April 16, 2012

This includes 35% who consider it a Very Serious problem and seven percent (7%) who view it as Not At All Serious....

Eighty-two percent (82%) believe all voters should be required to prove their identity before being allowed to vote. Only 14% oppose such a requirement.

Just 21% think laws requiring photo identification at the polls discriminate against some voters. Seventy-three percent (73%) disagree and feel that such laws do not discriminate.

Support for voter ID laws has increased over the years. It was 72% in June 2006 (as opposed to 82% today). The notion that these laws are discriminatory is losing ground. Last month, 67% said the laws don't discriminate, and 73% say that now.

Most voters across partisan lines express confidence in election results, but Democrats are more confident than the others. A plurality (49%) of voters in President Obama’s party consider voter fraud a serious problem in America today, but that compares to 84% of Republicans and 58% of voters not affiliated with either of the major parties.

What accounts for that split? Do people feel more confident that the voting is accurate if they think the fraudulent votes, if any, are coming in on their side? (And conversely, that people worry about fraud when they picture the bad votes counting for the other side?)

Will this poll make Democrats think they should abandon their attacks on voter ID laws? I don't think so. Whatever people think consciously when asked these poll questions, the issue works as a way to keep massaging brains with the message that racial discrimination is ever out there, ready to burst forth, unless constant vigilance is maintained, and only the Democratic Party will maintain that vigilance for you. After all, they keep talking about these terrible voter ID laws.

95 comments:

This includes 35% who consider it a Very Serious problem and seven percent (7%) who view it as Not At All Serious....

Garage is a 7-percenter?

Also, we don't see totals of voter support in the 80's much anymore. The next time some pol or pundit opposing Voter ID uses "the will of the people" in any context, this situation should be asked of them.

What always strikes me is that somehow people can convince themselves that this is the ONLY area where there is no fraud. And if there is fraud, which they don't believe, then it isn't important because it wouldn't change anything.

That might be a nice world to live in, but I can't think of any other area without fraud and where there aren't ever increasing efforts to combat it.

Cheating in big cities was accepted as a part of the political facts of life until effective reform began. Now suddenly it's never been heard of, never been done. I was taught to vote as a civic duty by my Wisconsin mother and my Boston father would add "vote - early and often"

Everyone knows that Republicans are making a conscious effort to make it harder for traditionally democratic leaning constituencies to vote.

Everyone knows that the ATF make a conscious effort to make it harder for traditionally Democrat-leaning constituencies to buy cigarettes, liquor, set up utilities, enter town hall meetings where politicians that oppose Voter ID laws are speaking, etc.

Its also why they keep wanting felons to vote. 90 percent of all crooks are Democrats

The people committing voter fraud in the news recently are Republicans in Indiana, and idiot right wingers like James O'Keefe. Not to mention the entire Republican caucus clusterfuck. How many delegates were stolen from Ron Paul and Santorum?

Was out on a business trip all week and had to show my ID numerous times. Airport, checking in at the hotel, car rental place and even at a bar which had an ID everyone policy. Saw a lot of elderly and minority people at these placed so I wonder how they got around the ID requirements since liberals keep saying its too difficult for them to obtain.

if only 14% of the likely voters are against an ID check, what does it tell you about the racial split?

after all, there HAVE to be a fair number of rabid white Dems built into that 14%. That implies to me that the 14% can't just be Blacks motivated by memories of Jim Crow and the Racial Justice NAN guys.

It implies to me that perhaps half the Blacks and many more than half the Hispanics think IDs are good.

Since it is now settled that the Second Amendment protects the individual's right to keep and bear arms, I'm sure that Attorney General Holder and others on the left end of our political spectrum oppose requiring ID in order to purchase a handgun, don't they? Otherwise the government would be unduly burdening the Second Amendment rights of the poor, minorities, and students, wouldn't it?

In its fumbling attempts to explain the purge of US attorneys, the Bush administration argued that the fired prosecutors were not aggressive enough about addressing voter fraud. It was a phony argument as there was no evidence that any of them ignored real instances of voter fraud. But more than that, it is a window on what may be a major reason for some of the firings.

In partisan Republican circles, the pursuit of voter fraud is code for suppressing the votes of minorities and poor people. By resisting pressure to crack down on “fraud,” the fired US attorneys actually appear to have been standing up for the integrity of the election system."

John McKay, one of the fired attorneys, says he was pressured by Republicans to bring voter fraud charges after the 2004 Washington governor’s race, which a Democrat, Christine Gregoire, won after two recounts. Republicans were trying to overturn an election result they did not like, but Mr. McKay refused to go along. “There was no evidence,” he said, “and I am not going to drag innocent people in front of a grand jury.”

"One of the dismissed prosecutors has revealed that he was pressured by Republican officials to target the advocacy group ACORN for voter fraud. ACORN was working on a voter registration drive in low-income and largely minority neighborhoods in New Mexico. David Iglesias told Newsweek that he found no case worth bringing against ACORN. But that apparently did not please the White House. Last week Attorney General Alberto Gonzales's ex-chief of staff D. Kyle Sampson testified that during the run-up to the mid-term election White House adviser Karl Rove complained that Iglesias and two other U.S. Attorneys had not done enough to prosecute so-called voter fraud."

Everyone knows that Republicans are making a conscious effort to make it harder for traditionally democratic leaning constituencies to vote.

Right! Because as EVERYONE knows that democrat voters are too stupid to be able to get identification, even when it is free.

Democrats are sooooo stupid they can't drive cars and have no driver's licenses.

They are also unable to rent movies, rent cars, ride on airplanes, cash checks, open bank accounts and many more daily routine activites that the rest of us more fortunately intellectually endowed Republicans can do.

Yes indeed. Asking voters to have proper identification is nothing more than an eveeeeel Republican plot against people too stupid to obtain ID.

Bwhahahahaha!!

Note: I'd better make sure that hat boy understands that I wasn't serious about it being a plot. Since he is one of those dim democrat leaning voters, we have to be very sure not to discriminate against him because of his disability of being terminally stupid.

Republicans wouldn't be bothering with the voter ID laws, defending them in court, if they didn't think it could tip an election.

That's exactly right, but not in the disenfranchisement way you're implying. Rather, eliminating Democrat voter fraud in any given election could potentially be the difference between a legitimate Republican win and a fraudulent Democrat win.

According to this, you need to prove your id and address to vote in Canada:

Everyone who votes must prove their identity and address. This page lists all the types of proof of identity and address accepted at the polls.

Here are some of the ways you can prove your identity and address at the polls:

To prove your identity (name), you can show a piece of ID with your name on it, like a fishing license, library card, social insurance card (SIN card), birth certificate or Veterans Affairs Canada Health Identification Card. To prove your address, you can show an official letter called an "Attestation of Residence." If you have gone to a shelter for food or lodging, you can ask the shelter administrator for this letter. If you don't have documents to prove your identity and address, you can take an oath and get someone you know to vouch for you. That person has to be an eligible elector in the same polling division as you, and he or she must show authorized documents that prove his or her identity and address.

I'm typically not a big fan of polls but I think this sounds right. I consider myself a slightly-left-of-center moderate, and do not oppose these laws so long as the requisite identification is free and can be obtained relatively easily. Maybe ACORN, etc., should focus more on helping people get the identifications and less on lawsuits, because I think at this point it's pretty clear that these laws are here to stay.

To prove your identity (name), you can show a piece of ID with your name on it, like a fishing license, library card, social insurance card (SIN card), birth certificate or Veterans Affairs Canada Health Identification Card.Shouldn’t they have to show something with their picture on it? My library cards don’t have my photo on them nor did my fishing license the last time I bought one.

My library cards don’t have my photo on them nor did my fishing license the last time I bought one.

I think you typically have to show a photo i.d. in the first instance to obtain a library card or fishing license. So I'm okay with that counting for identification purposes. Requiring any kind of government issued i.d., regardless of whether there's a photo on it, will go a long way to curb voter fraud.

garage mahal said...The diff. won't be enough to change the outcome of an election.

Republicans wouldn't be bothering with the voter ID laws, defending them in court, if they didn't think it could tip an election.

The corollary of that would be; Democrats would be bothering with voter ID laws, defending them in court if they thought it could tip an election.Democrats don't because they already know how to steal an election. And do.

The progressive stance on this topic is insulting to minorities and the voting poor. There is no other explanation than liberals believe the cohorts they pretend to protect are too weak to protect themselves and too stupid and lazy to arm themselves with free and simple photo identification. It is appalling that this contempt is coupled with sanctimony.

I think registering to vote is the easiest thing in the world and certainly doesn't need to be made easier. If it were me, third parties unknown to the registrant wouldn't be allowed to handle the registrations at all.

Canuck, I don't know what you are talking about with the 48 hours thing, but it's quite common (and necessary) to have a registration deadline well before the election.If you can't check a registration for validity, what good is it?

"... There is no other explanation than liberals believe the cohorts they pretend to protect are too weak to protect themselves and too stupid and lazy to arm themselves with free and simple photo identification..."

Well that's pretty much the basis for contemporary liberalism in this country. It takes a village and all that.

The belief that minorities and the poor are incapable of obtaining a photo ID is simply laughable. An Indiana drivers license costs $20. A state ID card is $13 and for 65 and older its $10. A voter ID card is free.

Down south here we have voter ID cards issued by the state electoral commission. Heavy duty plastic, holograms, picture, encrypted barcodes and the works.

Pretty tamper proof.

If you do not have one you not only can't vote, I don't think you can even register to vote.

And yet we routinely get 80%+ turnout in our elections.

We also have paper ballots and UV specific finger ink.

We still get crappy politicians but in 40 years I don't recall any serious allegations of fraud. It is not even a joke here as it seems to be in most of the northern states "Vote early, vote often", "Election day when the dead rise from the grave" and so on.

I fail to see what the big deal it about voter ID.

In some (all?) states police departments will issue IDs, sort of a non-driver driver's license. Does anyone know how much these cost? My understanding is that they are pretty cheap but I do not know.

My understanding also is that they are pretty easy to get, but again don't know.

It shouldn't be either difficult OR be extremely easy. The registration of the voter is something that needs to be verified for authenticity and to prevent fraud.

If that process takes a week or so.....well that is just part of the responsibility of the voter. It is your duty to take the time and be prepared.

It isn't as if there weren't plenty of warning and time before the elections to get yourself registered. With very VERY few acceptable exceptions is there ever a need to register the day of the election.

The rest of those who didn't register are careless,lazy and irresponsible. Perhaps they shouldn't be voting if they can't do something as simple as get registered. There is plenty of helpful organizations out there to accomplish this and it isn't costly at all. In fact.....it is free.

"In Mexico, there is a general electoral census. Any citizen of age 18 or greater must go to an electoral office in order be registered into the electoral census. Citizens receive a voting card (credencial de elector con fotografía), issued by the Federal Electoral Institute (IFE) that must be shown to vote in any election. The voting card also serves as a national identity document."

Kind of hard to get statistics on a virtually undetectable crime. When registration requires no confirmation and neither does voting, it's kind of hard to figure out if the person who voted was actually the person on the list.

It's not like it's rare to find instances of ineligible people on voter rolls. Or dead people. Or instances where more votes are cast than registered voters.

Minorities and the poor voting = election fraud. Righties can't quite come out and say that, although a few are honest enough about it.

Minorities and the poor are too dumb to get IDs? Strange, I live in a neighborhood with quite a lot of poor minorities, and they all seem to have ID to buy beer and cigarettes, even the ones I know are undocumented.

The Mexican card sounds sort of like ours. the big exception is that our voter ID card cannot be used as a general identity card. It can only be used for voting and related matters (change of address or such)

The League of Women Voters pulled their registration efforts out of Florida. Too bad so sad. Cui Bono?

"It imposed new rules on groups that conduct voter registration drives, including fining them each time a volunteer does not turn in a voter registration form within 48 hours. That section has prompted the League of Women Voters to stop registering new voters in Florida."

Oh boo fucking hoo.

They have to play by the rules and decided it was too much work to turn in forms within two days. So they flounce off in a huff.

Give me a break. This isn't voter intimidation. It is morons not able to comply with the rules.

The League of Women Voters pulled their registration efforts out of Florida. Too bad so sad. Cui Bono?

Work is hard. I cannot imagine the agonizing torture of having to hand in registration forms within 48 hours.

I could be mean and say men would have still done the job and tie it in to further dismantling the myth of a wage gap, but it isn't necessary and plenty of women here have the ethics to not just quit something once it ceased being nothing but butterflies and cotton candy.

I don't see why a third party should be able to handle a completed voter registration form. It has all the information an identity thief would ever need. Plus, there's too much room for shenanigans.Why can't the League of Women Voters pass out blank voter registration forms, postage paid, and let the registrant fill it out and mail it in?

the issue works as a way to keep massaging brains with the message that racial discrimination is ever out there, ready to burst forth, unless constant vigilance is maintained, and only the Democratic Party will maintain that vigilance for you.

The irony of the voter ID peeves brought by the Democrates is that whatever reason they bring forward that prevents people from obtaining ID, are also good reasons for the same people to be unable, or unwilling, to vote.

Let's turn this around...prove to me that voter ID disfranchment is rammant and we can talk about repeal of this law.

We here all the time of the hundreds of thousands of people that are disfranchised...yet they remain nameless. Sure there's the one old lady who has an issue with her birth certificate and is unwilling to part with the $100 to get it fixed...and the asshole who actually has a photo ID but wanted to use his veterans ID. That's it? "Hundreds of thousands" of disfranchised voters and that is all you can come up with? Jim Doyle used to talk qbout his 80 year old mom...hey asshole, drive her to the DMV!

"You should have to prove laws are actually needed, and do no harm, before you enact them."

Haha, you're OK with ObamaCare taking over one sixth of the economy but showing a photo ID when you vote is too intrusive? Ha ha, how very hacktivist of you.

MadMan, are you pretending that dems don't routinely commit voter fraud and cheat in elections? Ever hear of Acorn (they operated in many states)? IIRC, they are still around but changed their name.

You think that requiring voters to show a photo ID to prevent voter fraud is a bad idea? Only the hard core dems think that way, the dems that are willing to cheat to win an election and know that voter ID laws will make it more difficult for them to cheat. Americans are overwhelmingly for voter ID laws for good reason.

For those who think it is important to protect the integrity of elections in the USA, read John Fund's book about election fraud in the USA.